Skip to main content

Full text of "Postilla"

See other formats


7 \ eu 
yes 
+ 


N6h9 Oo 
ea Ys Y 
Varner 


$ » 
Fh ahs 


4 
ELAS f 
\Ne 


rt a 
aw 
Serres 3 


Hose 


bey 3 


i= 
alan a 
awh aks 


my 
Tet 


ah. 


Fs, 
Hf 


fe 


Le 
iy 
im 


HARVARD UNIVERSITY 
we 
Library of the 
Museum of 


Comparative Zoology 


Tas . ; > a i vS ¥ i a 


fH | 
; 4 
ay 
7 
| 
i 
f : 
r 
f ft i ’ 
pee 4 
i lis rae 
4 rite Se 
Wet 
y 
‘ 
t 
s4 
4 
L 
‘ ‘ 
ae 
~ 
{ 
) 
} 
i] 
1 : ry = 
' are 
wi! i Pai 
Le? J aan) 
a bh | i « i 4 . 


nt ee 
— = 
a 

7 4 
a 

—~ oad 
4 
ae 


— 
= a 
a 
- Sieek 
y 
§ 


ey 


POSTILLA 
PEABODY MUSEUM 
YALE UNIVERSITY 


NUMBER 151 28 JULY 1971 


THE FORM AND FUNCTIONS OF THE 
AVICULARIA OF BUGULA (PHYLUM 
ECTOPROCTA) 


KARL W. KAUFMANN 


POSTILLA 


Published by the Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University 


Postilla includes results of original research on systematic, evolution- 
ary, morphological, and ecological biology, including paleontology. 
Syntheses and other theoretical papers based on research are also 
welcomed. Postilla is intended primarily for papers by the staff of 
the Peabody Museum or on research using material in this Museum. 


Editors: Zelda Edelson, Elizabeth G. Weinman, Elise K. Kenney. 


Postilla is published at frequent but irregular intervals. Manuscripts, 
orders for publications, and all correspondence concerning publications 
should be directed to: 


Publications Office 
Peabody Museum of Natural History 
New Haven, Conn., 06520, U.S.A. 


Lists of the publications of the Museum are available from the above 
office. These include Postilla, Bulletin, Discovery, and special publica- 
tions. Postilla and the Bulletin are available in exchange for relevant 
publications of other scientific institutions anywhere in the world. 


Inquiries regarding back numbers of the discontinued journal, Bulletin 
of the Bingham Oceanographic Collection, should be directed to: 


Walter J. Johnson, Inc. 
111 Fifth Avenue 
New York, N.Y. 10003. 


THE FORM AND FUNCTIONS OF THE AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 
(PHYLUM ECTOPROCTA)* 


KARL W. KAUFMANN 


Department of Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, 
Chicago, Illinois 60637 


(Received June 10, 1970) 
ABSTRACT 


The most important function of the bird’s head avicularium of 
Bugula simplex and B. stolonifera is that of reducing the tube-build- 
ing activities of amphipods. These avicularia would probably also 
be effective in reducing predation by animals of such a size and 
shape that could be readily seized. That the avicularium is well 
adapted to such functions is indicated by: 

1) the structurally sound design that maximizes the force that can 
be applied for the least amount of material; 

2) the arrangement of the musculature that increases the ability to 
grasp objects of small diameter; 

3) the reaction to mechanical stimuli, namely, nodding and closing 
the mandible; 

4) the placement of avicularia on the colony in positions where they 
can easily seize crawling organisms. Animals effectively seized by 
avicularia are those that crawl over the colony and are 0.5 to 4 mm 
long with either many appendages or wormlike bodies less than 
0.05 mm in diameter. Most animals outside this range of size and 
shape, including most potential predators and larvae of fouling 
organisms, are inhibited very little by Bugula-type avicularia. 


*Publication No. 85 from the Center for Marine and Environmental Studies, 
Lehigh University. 


POSTILLA 151: 26p. 28: JULY 1971 


2 POSTILLA 


INTRODUCTION 


Avicularia are modified individuals of an ectoproct colony; they 
have greatly enlarged opercula and greatly reduced polypides. They 
are confined to the Cheilostomata, the most diverse of the three 
Recent ectoproct orders, where they occur in a majority of the 
families. There is a great diversity of types of avicularia. The shapes 
of the mandibles vary from broad and spatulate to narrow and 
pointed, and may vary in size by a single order of magnitude (Fig. 1). 
Even for similarly shaped mandibles, the form of the entire avi- 
cularium may vary drastically (Fig. 2). 

Three primary functions have been suggested for avicularia of all 
types (Table 1): food gathering, defense and the creation of water 
currents. Some of the references have been to specific types of 
avicularia, commonly to those found on Bugula, but often all types 
were implied to have the same function. Hincks (1880, p. lxxviii) 


FIG. 1. Types of mandibles found on avicularia. Note the large range in size 
and shape; F, G, H and E, J, O were on the same colonies. [A, E, J, K, M, O, 
P: Q)V after Harmer, 1926, pls) xvill, XxXv. XV) XXII xKiexovesexVIIn 
XXii, xvi respectively; B, C after Harmer, 1934, pl. xxxix, D, F, G, H, I, L, N, 
R, S, T after Harmer, 1957, pls. 1xxx, 1xv, 1xv, 1xv, 1xxiii, 1 xiii, 1xii (fig. 67 
on p. 721), 1xv, 1xx respectively.] 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 3 


FIG. 2. Various types of avicularia found on Cheilostomata Ectoprocta. 
K shows two vibracula (Vb), polymorphic structures similar to avicularia 
(Av). (B, G, H, I, J, K, L, M after Harmer, 1926, pls. xxiii, xxvii, xxviii, 
XXVili, XXXii, Xvi, xxix, xxiv respectively; F after Harmer, 1934, pl. 
xxxvi; A, C, D, E after Harmer, 1957, pls. 1xii, liv, xiii, 1 respectively.) 


and Marcus (1926, p. C 56) dispelled the food-gathering hypothesis 
by noting, among other things, that no type of avicularium could 
possibly capture the phytoplankton that ectoprocts eat. Harmer 
(see Table 1) provided the strongest support for the defense hypo- 
thesis. He concluded that avicularia would be especially effective 
aganist larvae of fouling organisms, particularly larvae of other 
ectoprocts, and against intruders crawling over the colony. Marcus 
(1926, p. C 58) noted that the large spacing of avicularia on the col- 
ony allowed many small epizoans to become established on the 
colony. The third primary function, the creation of water currents, 


POSTILLA 


(oce 4) 656] “URWAH 
(9ST 4) ST6T ‘SIMIOH 

(CYS S750) ISS] <= 
CCL=6 D606 
(98r “d) 9681 ‘owe 
(xIxxI ‘d) OST ‘SyourH, 
(ZZ 4) ZTL8T ‘seg 

Gor Oarss 
(gz ‘d) epcgy ‘ysng 
(ZL 4) Eps “UYyory 


(19 4) OZ6T ‘J9[sseg pue nueD 
(9ST ‘d) C16] ‘SIMI9H 

(ZZ 4) ZL8T ‘sues 

(Cold) 9763 
GZ2Oes|——— 

(SIT 4) 6r8I Asn 

(pee 4) Lg ‘uojsuyor 

(ZL “d) Epgt ‘UYyory 


(61 4) g96] ‘weysey4D 

(sg¢ d) 196] ‘IonneH 

9¢ 9 6c6l 
(p9 ‘19 “d) 

OZ6I ‘1oIsseq pue nuedy 

(69 4) O06T 9ATRO 


(06 4) gggt ‘uorne 

(Srz 4) Lest TheATea 

($89 “d) Opgt ‘uueWIpION 

(07 4) 98LT ‘Jepuejog pur siTq 
(9¢ “d) SCL ‘SITA 


SLNAYANO 
YALVM AO NOILVAAO 


SQOYUNV TIAOSIN ASNH4Adad ONIAAHLVS GOOA 


VINVTINDIAY AO SdadAL TIV AO SNOILONNYA DHL NO AYNLVYALIT AHL JO AUYVWWNS “[T ATAVL 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 5 


has been described as aiding in respiration, washing away excretory 
products or driving the prey toward the tentacles. Hincks (1880, 
p. Ixxvii) made the important observation that the large variation in 
mandible types indicates that not all avicularia have the same func- 
tions. However, the implicit assumption that a particular avicularium 
has only one function is common. While this may be true under a 
broad definition of the presumed function, such an approach ob- 
scures the possibility that the structure is a compromise resulting 
from many selective forces acting concurrently. Thus the most fruit- 
ful question to ask is not what is the function of an avicularium, but 
rather what are the selective forces that have been most important 
during the evolution of the avicularium. The answer may then be 
phrased in terms of causes rather than results. To ask such a ques- 
tion, One must separate what the structure can do, and is thus 
available for selection, from what the structure actually does while 
interacting with the environment. In a careful analysis of functional 
morphology, Bock and Von Wahlert (1965) made this distinction 
and explained that although a structure may have many faculties 
(the ability to do many things), only a few of these may be important 
to the animal. (“Faculty,” as used here, is nearly equivalent to Bock 
and Von Wahlert’s use of the term. “Function” is equivalent to their 
term, “biological role.”’) 

This paper first examines the faculties of the avicularia of Bugula, 
and then evaluates the selective forces associated with these avi- 
cularia. It amplifies an earlier preliminary report (Kaufmann, 1968). 


TERMINOLOGY 


The terms, “ventral” and “dorsal,” are used by analogy to the 
autozooid where the ventral side is the side of the opening into the 
interior, through which the lophophore projects. The various parts 
of the avicularium (Figs. 3, 4 and 5) will be referred to as follows: 


adductor muscle support — the prominent, bulbous part to which 
the adductor muscles are attached 

rostrum — a beaklike projection attached to the distal part of the 
adductor muscle support 

peduncle — the portion proximal to the adductor muscle support 

peduncle cushion — the rounded projection from the autozooid 


6 POSTILLA 


mandible — the appendage attached to the ventral part of the avi- 
cularium 

cryptocyst — a horseshoe-shaped partition between the rostrum and 
the adductor muscle support which continues into the peduncle 
and forms a strut across the ventral part of the peduncle 

Reference is to the avicularia of both Bugula stolonifera and 

B. simplex unless otherwise specified. 


ADDUCTOR 
MUSCLE 
SUPPORT ROSTRUM 
CRYPTOCYST 
__ SENSORY 
BRISTLES 
FRONTAL 
MEMBRANE 
AUTOZOOID 
/ MANDIBLE 


PEDUNCLE 


PEDUNCLE 
CUSHION 


FIG. 3. Avicularium of Bugula simplex. Only the chitinous and calcitic parts 
and the sensory bristles are shown. 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA ie 


CRYPTOCYST 


DORSAL 
SIDE 


ADDUCTOR 
MUSCLES 


PEDUNCLE 


TENDON 
CUSHION 


ABDUCTOR 


MUSCLES VENTRAL 
CRYPTOCYST SIDE 
FRONTAL MEMBRANE 
PORE 
.05 mm 


FIG. 4. Cutawav view through a sagittal section of an avicularium of Bugula 
simplex, The sensory bristles and soft parts other than the muscles have 
been omitted. 


MATERIALS AND METHODS 


Avicularia were studied in live specimens and in dried and mounted 
material. All of the colonies of Bugula simplex and B. stolonifera 
used for observational and experimental work were collected from 
the supply department dock in Eel Pond of the Marine Biological 
Laboratory at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. The majority of the 
colonies came from two tires suspended from floating docks and 
covered primarily with ectoprocts, tunicates, barnacles, sponges and 
hydroids. 

Avicularia were dried or mounted in Lakeside Cement. Mounted 
specimens were cleared in a series of alcohols and xylene and 
stained in carmine red or methylene blue. Specimens observed with 
the scanning electron microscope were dried and coated with 200 A 


8 POSTILLA 


FIG. 5. Photographs of dried avicularia of Bugula simplex taken with a 
scanning electron microscope. A. The mandible is partially open. B. The 
mandible is closed and the strut across the peduncle cushion is visible where 
the membrane has been pressed around it. C. The mandible is open to its 
maximum extent. D. The mandible is completely open and the ventral sur- 
face is facing upward. E. The mandible is closed; note the rounded ventral 
edge of the rostrum. F. Detail of D; the hinge is best seen in the lower left 
corner. The tendon appears as a broad ribbon passing over the support 
between the hinges. G. Detail of E; the membrane attached to the curved 
support on the mandible has been pressed into the pore in the proximal part 
of the mandible. Note the attachment of this membrane to the rim of the 
peduncle. H. Detail of E; note the shrunken membrane between the peduncle 
and the peduncle cushion. I. Detail of E; note the attachment of the membrane 
over the peduncle to the rim of the peduncle. Scale 1 applies to B, C, D, E. 
Scale 2 applies to F, G, H, I. A is reduced 20% relative to Scale 1. 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 9 


10 POSTILLA 


of gold and palladium. A motion picture of the movement of avi- 
cularia was made. Measurements of wall thickness were determined 
partially by direct measurement and partially by observing differ- 
ences in interference colors under polarized light. 


FORM AND STRESS ANALYSIS OF THE AVICULARIUM 


The form of an avicularium is a strong one for dealing with stresses 
that result from the grasping of an object between the mandible and 
the rostrum (Fig. 6A, B). Parts that must withstand compressional 
stresses are calcified and shaped so that shear stresses and bending 
moments are minimized, thus reducing the amount of skeletal ma- 
terial needed, whereas parts that must withstand shear stresses and 
bending moments, in addition to compressional stresses, are thicker 
and contain even more calcite. Those parts that must withstand 
tensional stresses have little calcite and a large proportion of 
chitinous matrix. 

The wall material consists of a chitinlike matrix with varying 
amounts of calcite. Calcite, like most minerals, has high compres- 
sional strength and low tensional strength. Its brittleness and ease 
of cleavage indicates that it is comparatively weak under bending 
moments and shear stresses. It is reasonable to hypothesize that the 
organic matrix has a higher tensional strength than calcite, although 
I know of no work on the structural properties of the matrix. 

The adductor muscle support (Fig. 3) is shaped like a portion of 
slightly flattened sphere. The wall is thin (about 0.0024 mm) com- 
pared to other parts of the avicularium. The adductor muscles 
(Fig. 4) close the mandible. Their insertions are evenly distributed 
over the rounded portion of the adductor muscle support. The 
muscle fibers join and merge into successively larger bundles toward 
the attachment to the tendon. 

The nearly spherical shape of the adductor muscle support re- 
duces the shear stresses and bending moments that develop (Fig. 6) 
when the adductor muscles contract, so that the major remaining 
stresses in the wall material are compressional. The shear stresses 
and bending moments are at a minimum under the following condi- 
tion. The direction of the vector sum of the forces exerted by the 
muscles passes through both the center of the arc described by the 
adductor muscle support in sagittal section (Fig. 7, M) and the 


Gq BENDING MOMENT 
| SHEAR STRESS 


COMPRESSIONAL STRESS B 


TENSIONAL STRESS 


-7OoOo Se 


mp EXTERNAL FORCE .OSmm 


FIG 6. Distribution of stress that would result if the avicularium grasped an 
object with the mandible open 50°. Only the components of the forces that 
are parallel to the plane of the diagrams are shown. A. Cutaway view of a 
sagittal section. Note that several of the symbols are on the part of the 
avicularium behind the plane of the section. F; — Force on the adductor 
muscle support from the adductor muscles. Fo — Force on the mandible 
from the adductor muscles. F; — Reaction forces on the rostrum and man- 
dible from the object that is grasped. B. Plane view of the distal part of the 
cryptocyst. Fy — Forces on the cryptocyst from the adductor muscles. — 
F; — Forces on the fulcrum of the cryptocyst from the mandible. 


2 POSTILLA 


FIG. 7. Sagittal section of Bugula simplex showing the mandible and adductor 
muscles in several positions. In Position A, the mandible is completely closed. 
Position B (50° from A) is the point at which the adductor muscle support 
can withstand the greatest force from the muscles in an isometric contraction. 
Position C (90° from A) is the point at which the tendon (not shown) first 
touches the hinge line. Position D (180° from A) is the maximum extent of 
opening. Point L is the center of distribution of the adductor muscles. Point M 
is the center of the circle describing the arc of the adductor muscle support. 
The muscle strands are diagrammatic, but show the most proximal and 
distal limits of attachment. 


center of distribution of the adductor muscles (Fig. 7, L). This direc- 
tion is parallel to the tendon attached to the mandible. Such is the 
case when the mandible is opened 50° (Fig. 7, Position B). 

The shape of the dorsal margin of the rostrum is similar to that 
of the curved compressional stress trajectories developed in a rec- 
tangular beam constrained at one end with zero degrees of freedom 
and loaded at the other with a force perpendicular to the long axis 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 13 


of the beam. Such stress trajectories are shown by Thompson (1917, 
p. 678) in his analysis of the form of bones. Using the same analogy 
to a beam Bock (1966) analyzed stresses in birds’ beaks some of 
which are shaped much like the rostrum. I conclude then, that the 
dorsal part of the rostrum, like the adductor muscle support, sus- 
tains minimal shear force and bending moment when an object is 
grasped as shown in Figure 6. Thus, the amount of calcite required, 
and hence the thickness of the wall, is minimized. The distal part 
of the rostrum which is considerably thicker is an exception. But 
here, both shear forces and bending moments would be concen- 
trated if some live and actively struggling animal were grasped. 

The tensional forces that develop when an object is grasped are 
concentrated along the ventral edges of the rostrum. As can be seen 
in the photographs taken with the scanning electron microscope 
(Fig. 5B, G), these edges are rounded rather than knifelike as noted 
by Harmer (1909, p. 720). When observed under a polarizing 
microscope, however, the isochromes are first-order grey, a fact 
indicating that a very small amount of calcitic material is present 
and that the ventral edges are mostly chitinlike. 

Forces exerted by the adductor muscles to close the mandible 
would collapse the adductor muscle support if it were not reinforced 
distally and proximally. Reinforcement is provided by the cryptocyst 
(Figs. 3, 4). The distal part is a heavily calcified, horseshoe-shaped 
structure that separates the rostrum from the remainder of the 
avicularium. Two fulcrums about which the mandible rotates are 
found on the ventral end of this portion of the cryptocyst. From the 
two fulcrums, the cryptocyst extends proximally into the peduncle 
and is continuous with a strut across the ventral portion of the 
peduncle (Figs. 4, 5B). The thickness and heavy calcification of the 
cryptocyst greatly increase its ability to withstand the shear forces 
and bending moments that develop when the mandible closes upon 
an object (Fig. 6A, B). 

The form of the peduncle (Figs. 3, 4) is perhaps the most difficult 
part of the avicularium to distinguish with certainty. It consists of a 
thickened semicircular wall to which is attached a flexible mem- 
brane on the ventral surface. The membrane extends from the 
curved ventral and proximal support of the mandible to the peduncle 
cushion. It is attached to the edge of the wall of the cryptocyst. The 
proximal part of the peduncle at the attachment to the peduncle 
cushion is flexible around the entire area of attachment. This can 
easily be seen in a motion picture taken of a live avicularium. 


14 POSTILLA 


The peduncle cushion (Figs. 3, 4) to which the peduncle is at- 
tached is a rounded flexible knob that projects from the rim of the 
lateral wall of the autozooid just below the orifice. The flexible 
nature of the peduncle cushion reduces the shear stresses that would 
develop at the point of attachment of the avicularium if the avi- 
cularium were pulled or twisted violently. The major stresses that 
remain at the point of attachment are tensional. Such pulling and 
twisting moments occur when a large organism is caught and 
struggles violently. If the avicularium were attached directly to the 
autozooid without the cushioning effect of the peduncle cushion, 
then a force parallel to the longitudinal axis of the autozooid would 
set up shear stresses at the relatively small area of attachment in- 
stead of transferring them to the much larger perimeter of the 
peduncle cushion. 

The mandible (Figs. 3, 4), unlike the rest of the avicularium, is 
lightly mineralized, but still rigid. The proximal part is supported by 
a bow-shaped structure covered by a membrane with a small pore in 
the center. A flat sheet extending from the strut across the hinge 
line to the place of attachment of the tendon, further reinforces the 
distal half of the mandible. On the distal end is a short spike that 
inserts into the rostrum when the mandible is closed. The part of 
the U-shaped channel that extends from the spike to the attachment 
of the tendon is thickened along the ventral portion, thus increasing 
the amount of bending moment and shear stress it can withstand. 
Just proximal to the spike, the sides of the U-shaped channel form a 
rounded notch. The spike can prevent an object from slipping out 
past the end of the mandible as it closes; it can also puncture objects, 
but such objects would have to be small enough to fit between the 
tip of the rostrum and the tip of the spike. 

The mandible is opened by means of two sets of abductor muscles 
(Fig. 4). One set depresses the frontal membrane of the peduncle, 
causing the mandible to rotate on its hinge, as shown by Silén (1950, 
p. 355, fig. 4) for Bugula flabellata. This set of muscles consists of 
7-10 strands that extend from the thickened part of the peduncle 
wall to the frontal membrane. Some strands converge to a small 
region halfway between the peduncle cushion and the mandible. The 
other set, which opens the mandible to its maximum extent, consists 
of a pair of muscle bundles, each with about five strands. The 
bundles are inserted on the adductor muscle support on either side 
of, and distal to, the adductor muscle and extend to the frontal 
membrane. I could not determine whether they were attached to the 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 15 


frontal membrane, as shown by Silén (1950) or to the bow-shaped 
support of the mandible, as shown by Calvet (1900, p. 50, fig. 9) for 
B. sabatieri [Calvet’s B. sabatieri is synonymous with B. simplex 
(Ryland, 1960, p. 97)]. The position of the avicularium with respect 
to the autozooid determines the maximal opening (about 180°) of 
the mandible. When the avicularium nods back and forth, the man- 
dible opens and closes slightly as it brushes against the surface of 
the autozooid. 

Sensory bristles project outward from a point just above the hinge 
line (Fig. 3). When the mandible is completely open, 50-100 
bristles extend as far as an imaginary line drawn from the tip of the 
rostrum to the tip of the mandible. Stimulation of the bristles causes 
the mandible to snap shut. Often whatever touches the sensory 
bristles is caught between the mandible and the rostrum, and is 
lodged in the rounded notch just proximal to the spike of the man- 
dible. If such an object remains still, it is released after a few sec- 
onds, but if the object is continually agitating, the grasp will not be 
released. 


FORM OF THE COLONY 


The branches of colonies of Bugula simplex (Fig. 8A) are 3-5 
zooids wide and arranged in fanlike clusters of about five branches 
per cluster. Bunches of these clusters are, in turn, arranged in 
conical groups that may consist of several concentric layers. The 
ventral surface of each zooid from which the polypide projects faces 
inward. The overall appearance of the colony is that of a tightly 
packed ball of thick branches, as high as 3 cm and several centi- 
meters in diameter. Prominent holes appear between the branches. 

Colonies of Bugula stolonifera (Fig. 8B) have the same rounded 
appearance as B. simplex, but the branches are biserial rather than 
multiserial and are not arranged in conical groups. Consequently, 
the individual zooids are more evenly dispersed over the region oc- 
cupied by the colony and there are no large “‘holes” in the colony, 
as exist in B. simplex. 

Avicularia are attached to the lateral margins of each branch in 
such a way that their nodding motion carries the tip of the rostrum 
into the space between branches. There is a space of about 0.5 mm 
between avicularia on branches of both species. 


16 POSTILLA 


FIG. 8. Branches from colonies of Bugula stolonifera (A) and B. simplex (B). 
Note the presence of avicularia (Av) on every zooid of the biserial branch 
of B. stolonifera, but only on the outer zooids of B. simplex. (A) from Maturo, 
1966, p. 572, fig. 12: (B) from Ryland, 1960, p. 92, fig. 13. 


THE FACULTY OF GRASPING 


The faculty of grasping can best be assessed if the diameter of an 
object that can be held securely can be determined. The ultimate 
force with which the mandible can close upon an object placed 
between it and the rostrum depends upon the size and position of 
the object and the moment that the muscles exert through the ten- 
don about the hinge. 

The length of the moment arm as a function of the angular open- 
ing of the mandible (Fig. 9) may be calculated by making the fol- 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 17 


lowing assumptions. The first assumption is that the resultant of 
the force of the adductor muscles acting on the mandible will 
always be along a line passing through the center of distribution of 
the adductor muscles (Fig. 7, Point L). Observations of live avi- 
cularia show that this is nearly true for all positions of the mandible. 
The second assumption is that the muscles all converge at one point, 
where they are attached to the end of the tendon. The region of 
convergence is small enough to make this assumption reasonable. 

The moment arm is at its maximum when the mandible is closed 
(Fig. 9). It decreases rapidly to half when the mandible is opened 
to 50° and to less than 1/20 of the maximum when the mandible 
opens 90°. Between 90° and 180° opening, the tendon wraps around 
the hinge line and the moment arms becomes just as long as the dis- 
tance between the axis of rotation and the slightly bowed strut across 
the hinge line. 

The tension developed in a muscle during an isometric contrac- 
tion is not the same at all extensions of the muscle. Mostly vertebrate 
muscles have been studied; for these there is one muscle length, the 
normal length of the muscle in the body, at which the maximum 


1.00 
” 

Ss = .80 
Ca 
<Gi> 

2 AGO 
2a 
a: 

Sa .40 
=a 
a 

.20 

O56 90° 180° 
CLOSED OPEN 


ANGULAR OPENING OF MANDIBLE 


FIG. 9. Graph of the length of the moment arm between the hinge line and 
the tendon as a function of mandible opening. Values are expressed as a 
fraction of the maximum moment that exists when the mandible is completely 
closed. 


18 POSTILLA 


tension can be developed. At greater or lesser lengths, the tension 
is less (Prosser and Brown, 1961, p. 433). From a purely mor- 
phological analysis, it is difficult to determine the length of maximum 
tension for the adductor muscles. Because some of the muscles vary 
considerably in length as the mandible closes, it cannot be assumed 
that the tension remains constant. The muscles that are inserted most 
distally in the adductor muscle support must contract almost 50% 
to close the mandible, and those near the center of distribution of 
the muscles (Fig. 7, Point L) must contract about 35%. The muscles 
that are most proximal appear to lengthen slightly while the man- 
dible rotates from 90° open to 50° open and then contract about 
10% in closing the mandible from there. 

However, in spite of the lack of knowledge about the changes in 
muscle tension relative to length, a more than twentyfold increase 
in the moment arm as the mandible closes makes it reasonable to 
assume that the force that can be exerted upon an object with the 
mandible partially closed is substantially greater than the force that 
can be exerted when the mandible is open 90° or more. When the 
mandible is opened more than 90°, the avicularium cannot grasp 
objects securely because the mandible and rostrum are not suffi- 
ciently opposed in this position. 

When the mandible is opened to 50°, the moment arm is half the 
maximum and an object 0.05 mm in diameter could fit into the 
space between the rostrum and the mandible. When it opens to 90°, 
the object size that can be grasped increases to only 0.1 mm while 
the moment arm is reduced to its minimum. The moment arm, then, 
gives the avicularium the faculty of grasping most securely objects 
which are at least 0.1 mm and preferably less than 0.05 mm in 
diameter. 


THE FACULTY OF NODDING 


The nodding motion of the avicularium consists of oscillation back 
and forth in an arc of nearly 180° in the plane of a sagittal section. 
It increases the effective area over which the sensory bristles can 
come in contact with an object. If the colony is undisturbed, the 
avicularia nod infrequently; Bugula simplex is less active than 
B. stolonifera in this respect. 

Stimulation of the sensory bristles of a single avicularium of 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 19 


B. stolonifera causes it to nod forward and snap shut. By nodding 
forward when an object touches the sensory bristles, the avicularium 
prevents the object from slipping past the distal end of the mandible 
before it closes completely. If nothing is caught, the avicularium 
continues nodding vigorously about once a second. Prodding the 
avicularium with a needle without touching the sensory bristles in- 
creases the nodding rate less than actually touching them. Stimula- 
tion of the tentacles of the individual to which the avicularium is 
attached causes no increase in nodding rate, but sticking a needle 
into the autozooid or removing the branch from the water briefly 
causes all avicularia on the branch to start nodding vigorously. 
Moving the branch around under water increases the nodding 
slightly. 

Rey (1927) and Forbes (1933) found many chemical stimuli that 
affect the nodding rate, but the relevance of these to the natural 
environment is not clear. 

Silén (1950, p. 350-358), working with Bugula flabellata and 
four other species of Bugula, hypothesized that the adductor muscles 
were responsible for nodding. These muscles pull on the membrane 
covering the peduncle, causing the avicularium to nod dorsally 
while using the lateral sides of the peduncle as a pivot. The resiliency 
of the dorsal part of the peduncle near the peduncle cushion causes 
the avicularium to nod ventrally when the muscles relax. This model 
required that the membrane on the ventral side of the peduncle be 
attached below the dorsal edge of the peduncle. 

Avicularia of Bugula stolonifera and B. simplex do not fit Silén’s 
model. In B. stolonifera, the membrane remains limp throughout the 
nodding motion and becomes taut only when the mandible snaps 
shut. Thus, the membrane cannot take part in the nodding. In addi- 
tion, rather than the lateral sides of the peduncle acting as a pivot, 
the avicularia are separated from the peduncle cushion by a thin 
membrane around the periphery of attachment (Figs. 3, 4 and 5H). 
The ventral edge of the peduncle is compressed inward at a point 
near the peduncle cushion as the avicularium nods ventrally. This 
deformation was seen clearly in a motion picture of live avicularia 
of B. stolonifera; however, the orientation of the avicularia on 
B. simplex prevented a clear view the peduncle of this species being 
deformed. Photographs of both species taken with a scanning elec- 
tron microscope indicate that the membrane is attached to the 
ventral edge of the peduncle (Fig. 5B, E), although the photographs 
are difficult to interpret because of shrinkage and deformation which 


20 POSTILLA 


may occur when the specimens are dried. These changes could cause 
the membrane to be pulled inward and appear attached below the 
rim of the peduncle in some (Fig. 5A) but not all (Fig. 5 I) photo- 
graphs. 

As far as I could determine, Calvet’s (1900, p. 53) explanation 
of the nodding motion in Bugula simplex is correct. This explana- 
tion implies that the peduncle deforms with both ventral and dorsal 
movements of the avicularium, instead of only with the dorsal move- 
ment as implied by Silén. However, I could not find the extensor 
and flexor muscles described by Calvet in the peduncle. 


INTERACTION OF AVICULARIA WITH THEIR ENVIRONMENT 


Many have observed the strength of avicularia. They can grab a 
needle “so firmly the branch might be shaken” (Darwin, 1839, 
p. 259), or capture various small organisms (Harmer, 1896, p. 485), 
but no one has evaluated the strength of avicularia in terms of the 
frequency of capture and ability to hold organisms commonly found 
on the colony. 

A wide variety of organisms inhabits colonies of ectoprocts col- 
lected in the field. Among the more common were nematodes, 
gammarid amphipods, and copepods. The gammarid amphipods 
(Corophium insidiosum and Jassa falcata) range in size from 0.5 mm 
to 4.5 mm and build tubes composed partly of ectoproct fecal ma- 
terial in the lower parts of the colonies where the polypides have 
degenerated into brown bodies. In late summer, when most of the 
polypides have degenerated, amphipods may have tubes covering 
the colony. I have counted as many as 100 amphipods inhabiting 
tubes or crawling about on a colony of B. simplex 2 cm high. Less 
common animals include triclad flatworms less than 1 mm long, 
pycnogonids and marine mites. Ciliates, hydroids, and more rarely 
tunicates, sponges and several species of ectoprocts, are also attached 
to colonies. 

The interaction between larger organisms and avicularia is quite 
remarkable. I have observed gammarid amphipods (Corophium 
insidiosum and Jassa falcata) 4 mm long, not counting the antennae, 
caught repeatedly by avicularia no longer than 0.2 mm. The few 
amphipods larger than 4 mm escape from avicularia readily, and 
those that remain in their tubes are not captured. Most often amphi- 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 21 


pods are caught by one of the hairs on their appendages and escape 
after two or three minutes of struggle. Occasionally an amphipod is 
caught by one of the terminal segments of the antennae and held 
as long as 37 hours. The larger amphipods (1-4 mm) wandering 
about on the colony, spend more than half their time trying to free 
themselves from the avicularia. By far the most frequently captured 
animals are amphipods. When present, nematodes larger than 1 mm 
and smaller than 3 mm long are also readily captured. A pycnogonid, 
10 mm across the legs, is held securely by an avicularium. Smaller 
nematodes, marine mites and flatworms are rarely captured. 

Harmer (1909, p. 720) claimed that avicularia discourage the 
settlement of larvae by crushing or puncturing them. Another possi- 
bility is that larvae are prevented from settling because either the 
avicularia or the lophophores brush them away as they approach the 
colony. To test this hypothesis and to determine whether anything 
unusual happens in the presence of larvae, I observed the interaction 
between ectoproct larvae and Bugula-type avicularia. 

Sixteen ectoproct larvae were placed in a shallow fingerbowl con- 
taining a brush of Bugula simplex oriented with its lophophores ex- 
tended upward. Many attempts were made to use the phototactic 
response of the larvae to maneuver them toward the branch, but 
very few actually made contact with anything but the lophophores. 
Often, a larva was drawn into a lophophore and held for a short 
time (as long as a full second) by curling the tips of its tentacles 
around the larva. It would then be ejected as is normally the case 
for a particle too large to be ingested. No larvae were caught or 
hindered by the mandible of the avicularium. Thus, the lophophores 
are a far more effective instrument for discouraging the settlement 
of larvae than the avicularia. 


DISCUSSION OF THE FACULTIES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS 


The best developed faculty of the Bugula-type avicularium is that of 
grasping objects about 0.05 mm or less in diameter. The forms of 
the individual parts, particularly the adductor muscle support, the 
cryptocyst, and the large moment arm for objects less than 0.05 mm 
in diameter, are structurally very sound for applying great force 
through the mandible. The intermittent nodding motion, the reac- 
tion to tactile stimuli by snapping the mandible shut and the spike on 
the mandible aid in capturing animals. The flexibility of the peduncle 


22 POSTILLA 


cushion prevents the avicularia from being twisted off by animals 
that are caught. 

The limitations of the faculty of grasping animals can be de- 
termined if the placement of the avicularia on the colony is con- 
sidered. First, the manner in which avicularia move in a plane 
parallel to the surface of the branches means that animals crawling 
on the surface are more easily caught, and animals swimming above 
the surface less easily caught, than if the avicularia moved in a plane 
perpendicular to the surface. Swaying into the holes in the branches 
of colonies of B. simplex increases the probability that the avi- 
cularium will come in contact with an animal crawling about on the 
colony, because such an animal must invariably crawl through these 
holes. Second, the spacing of about 0.5 mm between avicularia 
along the branches permits small animals to crawl about with a low 
probability of encountering an avicularium, whereas larger animals, 
particularly those that are longer than the spacing between avicularia, 
will be caught more frequently. Factors other than size and mode 
of movement which determine the frequency that animals come in 
contact with avicularia are the number of appendages suitable for 
being grasped, and the amount of commotion an organism makes 
in moving over the colony. Amphipods are usually grasped by one 
of the terminal segments of an appendage. Nematodes smaller than 
1 mm are captured infrequently, presumably because of their lack 
of appendages, while those larger are captured regularly because 
their violent twisting movement causes their bodies to cover a large 
area in their progress over a colony. 

The ability of the larger amphipods to escape can be attributed 
both to their strength and to the increased diameter of the terminal 
segments on their appendages. The upper size limit for the capture 
of many organisms of the same general shape as amphipods is 
probably about the same. Small annelids with many small hairs and 
spindly pycnogonids, although larger than 4 mm, could probably be 
captured. 

In comparison, the faculty of creating water currents and of 
brushing larvae or sediment off the colony is very poorly developed 
in Bugula-type avicularia. The compact form of the avicularium 
and the pointed tip of the mandible could not move water nearly as 
efficiently as a broad spatulate mandible (Fig. 1F), nor is the 
sporadic nodding motion capable of creating a continuous flow. In 
species of Bugula, at least, lophophores create a much stronger cur- 
rent flow through ciliary action. For brushing larvae and sediment 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 23 


away, a long narrow mandible or a vibraculum (Fig. 2) would be 
much more effective than a compact avicularium covering a limited 
part of the colony. 

Because the faculty of grasping is so well developed, there must 
have been strong selective pressures for it. The most obvious func- 
tion for the faculty of grasping is that of defense. Some animals may 
harm the colony but are either too small (ciliates), too large (fish and 
most molluscs), or are not the right size to be captured often enough 
to reduce their threat to the colony and be affected by the avi- 
cularia. Small snails have very few appendages and do not move 
actively about the colony. 

Smaller annelids, nematodes and crustaceans may crawl about 
on the colony, but just this alone does not appear to damage the 
colonies. Pycnogonids (Barnes, 1963, p. 377) and tanaid amphipods 
(Smith, 1906, p. 335) are predators of ectoprocts, but I observed 
few pycnogonids and no tanaids on the colonies I studied. Avicularia 
could be valuable controls of these predators where they are more 
common. 

Larvae deserve special mention because many workers have sug- 
gested that avicularia of most species aid in discouraging their settle- 
ment. The avicularia studied here cannot defend against larvae 
effectively. Most common fouling organisms have larvae that are 
less than 1 mm long and would as often find a place to settle between 
avicularia or on the dorsal surface of the colony as come in contact 
with an avicularium. More important, most larvae of fouling or- 
ganisms have few appendages suitable for being grasped, and are 
too large to be grasped by the body. The larvae of most ectoprocts, 
for example, are 0.15—0.2 mm in diameter with only short cilia 
protruding from their bodies. For an avicularium to grasp the entire 
body, it would have to open wider than 90° (Fig. 5, Position C) and 
the moment arm would then be reduced to its minimum. Nodding 
would certainly prevent larvae from settling within the small range 
of movement of the avicularia, but because the nodding movement 
is closely associated with the faculty of grasping, its separate use 
for the function of brushing away larvae would appear incidental 
to its function of increasing the probability that the sensory bristles 
will come in contact with an animal. 

Only the amphipods, Corophium insidiosum and Jassa falcata, 
do extensive damage through building their tubes in the colonies, 
thus preventing the lower parts of the colonies from regenerating 
new polypides and producing larvae. Avicularia do reduce the 


24 POSTILLA 


amount of tube building by capturing and holding amphipods that 
leave their tubes. Holding the amphipods for varying periods of time 
does not cause the amphipods to leave, but it does cut, by at least 
half, the time that they have available for building more tubes. 


CONCLUSION 


Grasping and retaining small organisms crawling over the colony 
are the most highly-developed faculties of the avicularia of Bugula 
simplex and B. stolonifera. These faculties reduce the tube-building 
activities of amphipods and can reduce the harm done by other 
organisms, such as predators of ectoprocts, provided shape, size and 
activity on the colony allow them to be caught frequently. Avicularia 
on other species of Bugula appear to have an equally well-developed 
faculty of grasping and probably have similar functions. 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 


The encouragement and valuable suggestions of Professor Thomas 
J. M. Schopf of the University of Chicago, at every stage of this 
paper are greatly appreciated. The study was supported by Thomas 
J. M. Schopf through National Science Foundation Grant GB 7325. 
Most of the work was carried out at the Marine Biological Labora- 
tory, Woods Hole, Massachusetts. The Rogick Collection of books 
and reprints at the library of the Marine Biological Laboratory was 
especially helpful. Dr. Frank Maturo, University of Florida, identi- 
fied B. stolonifera, and Mr. Allen Michael, Dalhousie University, 
Halifax, Nova Scotia, identified the amphipods. Dr. R. D. Allen, 
State University of New York at Albany, allowed the use of his 
time and facilities to make a motion picture of avicularia. Mr. Akira 
Kabaya of JOELCO, Inc., donated the use of their scanning electron 
microscope model JSM-2 and assisted in taking the photographs. 


AVICULARIA OF BUGULA 25 


LITERATURE CITED 


Barnes, Robert D. 1963. Invertebrate Zoology. W. B. Saunders Co., Phila- 
delphia. 632 p. 

Bock, W. J. 1966. An approach to the functional analysis of bill shape. Auk 
83: 10-51. 

Bock, W. J. and G. von Wahlert. 1965. Adaptation and the form-function 
complex. Evolution 19: 269-299. 

Busk, George. 1849. Observations on the sheppard’s purse coralline of Ellis 
(Notamia bursaria Fleming). Trans. Microscop. Soc. London 2: 110-112; 
Pl. xxv. 

1854a. Catalog of the marine Polyzoa in the collection of the British 

Museum. Cheilostomata Part II. p. iv—vii, 55-120; Pls. 69-124. 

1854b. Remarks on the structure and function of the avicularian 
and vibracular organs of the Polyzoa; and on their value as diagnostic 
characters in the classification of these creatures. Trans. Microscop. Soc. 
(N:S.), 2: 26-33; PI. ii. 

Calvet, Louis. 1900. Contributions a l’histoire naturelle des Bryozaires 
Ectoproctes marins. Théses présentées a la Fac. des Sci. de Paris. 
Montpellier. 488 p., 13 pls. 

Canu, F. and R. S. Bassler. 1920. North American early Tertiary Bryozoa. 
U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull.106. 2 vol. 879 p., 162 pls. 

1929. Bryozoa of the Phillippine Region. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 100. 
Vol. 9. 685 p. 

Cheetham, Alan. 1968. Morphology and systematics of the Bryozoan Genus 
Metrarabdotos. Smithsonian Misc. Collections 153(1) Pub. 4733, 121 p., 
18 pls. 

Dalyell, J. G. 1847. Rare and remarkable animals of Scotland. John van 
Voorst, London. Vol. 1. 268 p., 53 pls. 

Darwin, Charles. 1839. Journal of researches into the geology and natural 
history of the various countries visited by H.M.S. Beagle. Henry Col- 
burn, Great Marlborough St., London. 615 p. 

Ellis, John. 1751. An essay towards a natural history of the corallines and 
other marine productions of the like kind, commonly found on the 
coasts of Great Britain and Ireland. Privately published, London. 103 p., 
39 pls. 

Ellis, J. and Daniel Solander. 1786. The natural history of many curious and 
uncommon zoophytes. Benjamin White and Son, London. 206 p., 63 pls. 

Forbes, Alexander. 1933. Conditions affecting the response of the avicularia 
of Bugula. Biol. Bull. 65: 469-479. 

Gautier, Yves Victor. 1961. Recherches écologiques sur les Bryozoaires 
Chilostomes en Méditerranée occidentale. Théses présentées a la Fac. 
des Sci. de l'Université D’Aix-Marseille. Aix-En-Provence. 431 p. 

Harmer, Sidney F. 1896. Polyzoa. Vol. II, p. 465-491. Jn S. F. Harmer and 
A. E. Shipley [eds.] The Cambridge Natural History. Macmillan & Co., 
Ltd., London. 

1909. Address to the zoological section. Section D. Report Brit. Ass. 

Advance. Sci., 78th meeting. Dublin, 1908. John Murray, London, 

p. 715-731. 

1926. The Polyzoa of the Siboga Expedition Part II, Cheilostomata 

Anasca. p. i—vill, 181—501; Pls. xii—xxxiv. 

1931. Recent work on the polyzoa. Presidential address to the 

Linnean Society of London. Linn. Soc. Proc. 143: 113-168. 


26 POSTILLA 


1934. The Polyzoa of the Siboga Expedition Part III, Cheilostomata 

Ascophora I, Family Reteporidae. p. i—vi, 502-640; Pls. xxv—xli. 

1957. The Polyzoa of the Siboga Expedition Part IV. Cheilostamata 
Ascophora II. p. i-ix, 641-1147; Pls. xlii—Ixxiv. 

Herwig, E. 1915. Die avicularien von Bugula flabellata. Archiv fir Natur- 
geschichte. Embrik Strand, Berlin. Part A. 7: 156-159. 

Hyman, Libbie H. 1959. The Invertebrates. McGraw Hill Book Co., New 
York. Vol. V. 783 p. 

Hincks, Thomas. 1880. A history of the British marine Polyzoa. John van 
Voorst, London. Vol. I. 601 p. 

Johnston, George. 1847. A history of the British zoophytes. 2nd ed. John 
van Voorst, London. Vol. I. 488 p. 

Jullien, J. 1888. Bryozoaires. Mission Scientifique du Cap Horn 1882-83. 
Vol. VI, Zoologie, Part 3. 92 p., 15 pls. 

Kaufmann, Karl W. 1968. The biological role of Bugula-type avicularia. 
Proc. of the First Int. Conf. on Bryozoa, 1968. Atti della Societa 
Italiana di Scienze Naturali e del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di 
Milano 108: 54-60. 

Krohn, August. 1843. Uber die vogelkopfahnlichen und ihren verwandten 
Organe bei den Bryozoen. Jn Froriep und Froriep [eds.] Neue Notizen 
aus dem Gebiete der Natur- und Heilkunde. 25: 70-72. 

Marcus, Ernst. 1926. Bryozoen. Vol. 4, Part 7C, p. C1—C100, In G. Grimpe 
and E. Wagler [eds.! Die Tierwelt der Nord- und Ostsee; Akademische 
Verlagsgesellschaft, Leipzig. 

Maturo, Jr., Frank J. S. 1966. Bryozoa of the southeast coast of the United 
States: Bugulidae and Beaniidae (Cheilostomata: Anasca). Bull. of 
Marine Sci. 16: 556-583. 

Nordmann, Alex von. 1840. Recherches microscopiques sur la Cellularia 
avicularia. Vol. I, p. 679-707. In Voyage dans la Russie méridionale 
et la Crimée, exécuté en 1837 sous la direction de M. Anatole de Demi- 
doff. E. Bourdin et Cie., Paris. 

Prosser, C. Ladd and Frank. A. Brown, Jr. 1961. Comparative animal 
physiology, 2nd ed. W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. 688 p. 

Rey, P. 1927. Action de divers agents sur les mouvements des aviculaires 
de Bugula. Bull. Soc. Zool. France 52: 367-379. 

Ryland, J. S. 1960. The British Species of Bugula (Polyzoa). Proc. Zool. Soc. 
London 134: 65-105, 3 pls. 

Sars, George Ossian. 1872. On some remarkable forms of animal life from 
the great deeps off the Norwegian Coast Part I. University Programme, 
Christiania. 82 p., 6 pls. 

Silén, Lars. 1950. On the mobility of entire zooids in Bryozoa. Acta Zool. 
31: 349-386. 

Smith, Geoffrey. 1906. High and low dimorphism. With an account of cer- 
tain Tanaidiae of the Bay of Naples. Mittheilungen aus der zool. Stat. 
zu Neapel. 17: 312-340. 

Thompson, D’Arcy Wentworth. 1917. On growth and form. Cambridge 
University Press, Cambridge. 793 p. 


i Acme 


Bookbinding Co., Inc. 
300 Summer Street 

* Boston, Mass. 02210 

: > ENE eI 


3 2044 066 305 


—— 


Sb Cea uty 


€:¢ 
rh 


is 
i eepit 
neg Ge 

(yin 


(ents 
Whe f Mee 
: ae Gl 


2 BOs 
Cr a 
Sieve ta ve 


ou 


ie 
wath 


iris 
sats 
fr. 
iit 
ve (‘ate \ 


et 
Heren di 
er ii 


ee ; 


yj 
errs 
miftaes vt 


f 
ie phate ; 
JRE 

. & 

% 


wait gt ae ak 


| had 
eS Ory Rew ara 
CDA ed) 


NAP DSI E & 
Ska es aes 
Mean eked ‘ 


. 
ie 


Reng 


eae 
HVS eet 
WY de gk E